Comment Text:
Dear Chairman and Commissioners,
My name is Cameron Boykin, and I'm just an everyday citizen from Florida writing to share my thoughts on the Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Prediction Markets, as published in 91 FR 12516. I've been trading on platforms like Kalshi for a while now, and I believe these markets are valuable and should be regulated in a fair, balanced way. I'm not a financial expert or a lawyer, just someone who sees the benefit of participating in these markets and wants to make sure regular folks like me aren't shut out.
I trade on prediction markets because they give me a way to engage with real-world events and put my research and judgment to work. It's not gambling to me; it's about staying informed and making decisions based on what I learn. When people like me trade based on what we know, whether it's about elections or economic data, it helps the market come up with prices that reflect a clearer picture of what's likely to happen. That benefits everyone, not just traders. It's information you can't get from polls or news pundits, and I think that's worth protecting. In response to your questions on inside information, like in Questions 29 and 30, I'd say informed trading is a strength of these markets. It improves price discovery as long as existing laws against insider trading are enforced.
I also believe the United States should be a leader in this kind of financial innovation. If we over-regulate or ban these markets, we're just pushing activity to other countries where there's less oversight. That doesn't protect anyone; it just means we lose control and miss out on the benefits. Addressing Questions 7 and 8 on public interest, I think allowing innovation while keeping strong rules in place is the right balance. Don't let other nations take the lead on something we can do better and safer here.
Finally, I'm worried about broad bans or overly harsh rules. I've read through some of the concerns in your ANPR, and I get that there are risks like manipulation or bad actors. But shutting down entire categories of contracts, as discussed in Questions 15 through 22 on listed activities, feels like using a sledgehammer to crack a walnut. Targeted regulation that focuses on specific problems makes more sense to me. Punishing everyone for the actions of a few isn't fair, and the CFTC already has tools to go after fraud or insider trading. Use those instead of broad restrictions.
I hope you'll consider my perspective as a regular person who values the freedom to participate in legal, regulated markets. Please support proportionate regulation for prediction markets and avoid bans or rules that would lock out everyday traders like me. Thank you for taking the time to read this.
Sincerely,
Cameron Boykin
